Saturday, September 4, 2010

Of course, the laughable implication is that HE IS smart enough to prevent it, while all of us sub-humans aren't bright enough to see his unquestionable intelligence, judgment, and brilliance. I love all of these narcissistic scientists--deities from on-high, proclaiming our ignorance in not "seeing it their way" and understanding their obvious solutions to save us all from ourselves. Didn't a few scientists recently warn against this?

The collapse of a giant glacier in Antarctica WOULD NOT immediate push up sea levels, if it's already displacing water, genius. Thanks for the little bit of injected fear. When disaster doesn't happen, what will you say then? Probably not much, since you're 90. But in 30 years, a lot of the current crop of believers will be disbelievers when they see that the sky really isn't falling after all. So many have already seen through the lie.

He says that a 'a return to the Dust Bowl' of the 1930s would convince people of manmade climate change, but there are a few dilemmas in this assertion. First, what did the first Dust Bowl mean to the people of the day? Obviously, the Dust Bowl moderated...the climate changed--whether naturally or helped along by man--and then reverted back to its normal state (yes, I recognize that many have blamed this event on man). But the Dust Bowl was not blamed on man's CO2 emissions (therefore, another Dust Bowl...even if it happened...would be incorrectly blamed on climate change, given the historical record and this clown's assertion). Second, we're continually told that empirical weather events do not equal climate, unless of course, alarmists say it does. So we're supposed to accept their reasoning about weather events as a result of climate when it suits the alarmists' theories, but when it's cold, icy, and snowy, we're either told that this too is caused by man's climate discretions or that we shouldn't equate weather with climate. LOL! Nice scam, eh?

This is just more radical contorting from a believer who is watching his beloved theory implode. Unfortunately, you probably won't live long enough to be likewise branded as stupid for your fear mongering, Dr. Lovelock.

I will say this...at least you did give a bit of a head-nod to skeptics, and you are calling the Climategatescandal an ethical lapse...because it is!

Humans are too stupid to prevent climate change from radically impacting on our lives over the coming decades. This is the stark conclusion of James Lovelock, the globally respected environmental thinker and independent scientist who developed the Gaia theory.

It follows a tumultuous few months in which public opinion on efforts to tackle climate change has been undermined by events such as the climate scientists' emails leaked from the University of East Anglia (UEA) and the failure of the Copenhagen climate summit.